Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
18 Dec 2019, 15:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
Prompt:
"The following appeared in a speech delivered by a member of the city council.
Twenty years ago, only half of the students who graduated from Einstein High School went to attend a college or university. Today, two thirds of the students who graduate from Einstein do so. Clearly, Einstein has improved its educational effectiveness over the past two decades. This improvement has occurred despite the fact that the school's funding, when adjusted for inflation, is about the same as it was twenty years ago. Therefore, we do not need to make any substantial increase in the school's funding at the time."
ESSAY:
The member of the city council claims that Einstein High School does not need to have any increased funding at this time because there has been supposed improvement in the school's educational effectiveness despite its funding staying flat for the past 20 years. His argument is based on the premise that since two thirds of the students go on to attend college, as opposed to one half of students 20 years ago, the school's educational effectiveness had improved significantly without the need for additional funding to support this improvement. Stated this way, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. Furthermore, the conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence provided and hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that educational effectiveness is the cause or reason behind the increase in graduates to go on to attend college. He fails to recognize other factors that may attribute to this increase in college enrolment. For example, other outside influences such as decrease in cost to attend and enroll in college or a higher requirements for jobs that previously did not require a college degree in the current times are reasons that may have enabled and influenced more students to pursue a college education. The argument would have been clearer if it explicitly stated that there were very little reason to believe other factors were involved in the increase in graduates attending college.
Second, the argument compares two different set of populations and assumes similarity to prove his point. Unfortunately, it is incorrect to infer by vague statistics that both groups of students 20 years ago and those from today are similar in population type and sample size. To illustrate, the total student population 20 years ago may have been much more than today and thus, less students were able to attend college. Similarly, the type of students at Einstein high school could have changed drastically. The current students at the school may be more driven and ambitious compared to students 20 years ago who prefer to complete their schooling after earning their GED as opposed to a higher degree. If the argument had provided evidence that the students 20 years ago and today are comparable in terms of population size and other characteristics, the argument would have been a lot more convincing.
Finally, the argument assumes that the funding is what drives educational effectiveness and that the college is a determinant of educational effectives. This again, is a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate the correlation between these. Is educational effectiveness driven by funding or a sum of other factors? For example, factors such as quality and training of teachers? How many students who attended college attested to the quality of education for their drive to attend college? Without convincing answers to the above questions, the argument does not stand.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for above mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing.
"The following appeared in a speech delivered by a member of the city council.
Twenty years ago, only half of the students who graduated from Einstein High School went to attend a college or university. Today, two thirds of the students who graduate from Einstein do so. Clearly, Einstein has improved its educational effectiveness over the past two decades. This improvement has occurred despite the fact that the school's funding, when adjusted for inflation, is about the same as it was twenty years ago. Therefore, we do not need to make any substantial increase in the school's funding at the time."
ESSAY:
The member of the city council claims that Einstein High School does not need to have any increased funding at this time because there has been supposed improvement in the school's educational effectiveness despite its funding staying flat for the past 20 years. His argument is based on the premise that since two thirds of the students go on to attend college, as opposed to one half of students 20 years ago, the school's educational effectiveness had improved significantly without the need for additional funding to support this improvement. Stated this way, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. Furthermore, the conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence provided and hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that educational effectiveness is the cause or reason behind the increase in graduates to go on to attend college. He fails to recognize other factors that may attribute to this increase in college enrolment. For example, other outside influences such as decrease in cost to attend and enroll in college or a higher requirements for jobs that previously did not require a college degree in the current times are reasons that may have enabled and influenced more students to pursue a college education. The argument would have been clearer if it explicitly stated that there were very little reason to believe other factors were involved in the increase in graduates attending college.
Second, the argument compares two different set of populations and assumes similarity to prove his point. Unfortunately, it is incorrect to infer by vague statistics that both groups of students 20 years ago and those from today are similar in population type and sample size. To illustrate, the total student population 20 years ago may have been much more than today and thus, less students were able to attend college. Similarly, the type of students at Einstein high school could have changed drastically. The current students at the school may be more driven and ambitious compared to students 20 years ago who prefer to complete their schooling after earning their GED as opposed to a higher degree. If the argument had provided evidence that the students 20 years ago and today are comparable in terms of population size and other characteristics, the argument would have been a lot more convincing.
Finally, the argument assumes that the funding is what drives educational effectiveness and that the college is a determinant of educational effectives. This again, is a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate the correlation between these. Is educational effectiveness driven by funding or a sum of other factors? For example, factors such as quality and training of teachers? How many students who attended college attested to the quality of education for their drive to attend college? Without convincing answers to the above questions, the argument does not stand.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for above mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing.
21 Dec 2019, 22:02
Kudos
Bookmarks
imjen
Hi
PFA a review on your essay on Einstein School
Congratulations, Your essay is nicely done; Keep it up. Please avoid small mistakes.
You can certainly get full marks.
daagh
Hi
PFA a review on your essay on Einstein School
Congratulations, Your essay is nicely done; Keep it up. Please avoid small mistakes.
You can certainly get full marks.
daagh
Attachments
Imjen's essay on Einstein School.docx [16.44 KiB]
Downloaded 58 times
Moderator:
